This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the FAQ and RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate and remove the ads - it's free!

View Poll Results: REPUBLICANS ONLY PLEASE- YOUR TOP CHOICE FOR 2016 REPUBLICAN NOMINATION FOR PRESIDENT

Re: 2016 Republican Primary

That looks like an outlier though. McClatchy/Marist, CNN, and Quinnipiac all have Clinton leading Cruz with independents by double digits. The previous PPP poll had Clinton up by 19 with them too.

This was the last one I could find that broke down how independents view Cruz and Paul. It was published on 18 December. CNN had one published on the 26th of December but CNN didn't break theirs down into how independents viewed Cruz and Paul. In the CNN one Christie leads Hillary 48-46 instead of 45-42. CNN had Clinton leading Cruz 57-39 instead of 49-41 and Clinton lead Paul 54-41 in the CNN one instead of 48-43. But I was looking for a break down of independents which the latest poll, CNN didn't have so I went with PPP.

But I am not too worried about the discrepancies with the two polls concerning Cruz and Paul this far out. It is interesting that both give Christie the lead. CNN polled 950 RV with an error margin of plus or minus 3 points, PPP polled 1,316 RV with an error margin of plus or minus 2.7%. So both polls are not that far off from each other if you factor in the plus or minus error margins. Cruz could actually be at 42% in the CNN poll where PPP has him at 41 and he could be at 39% in the PPP poll with the margin error factored. Pretty close.

This is why I like the way RCP averages all the polls out together. They have 14 polls factored in when RCP does the Approval ratings and 11 when they do their favor/against in health care. This eliminate the wild swings and the margin errors pretty much. One poll can be way off, but when you average 5 or 6 or more, they come pretty close to the money.

Using RCP polls for December, 4 of them Christie leads Clinton by 0.7%, Clinton leads Cruz by 15 points and Clinton leads Paul by 10 points. I would put more stock in the averages I just listed instead of any single poll.

This Reform Party member thinks it is high past time that we start electing Americans to congress and the presidency who put America first and their political party further down the line. But for way too long we have been electing Republicans and Democrats who happen to be Americans instead of Americans who happen to be Republicans and Democrats.

Re: 2016 Republican Primary

Originally Posted by The Prophet

I think that would be an ideal general election matchup. Hillary and socialism vs Cruz and conservatism. Otherwise it would be Hillary and socialism vs <insert RINOS name here> and less socialism. Americans need a clear choice. Every 4 or 8 years we play ping pong between the 2 parties hoping for a change. When is the last time America had a genuine conservative candidate. Ohh, that's right, Raygun. And we all know how that election turned out!

It would greatly behoove the GOP to nominate a conservative IF they want to win. While Hillary has name recognition going for her, she is still a liberal, and no country has ever taxed itself into prosperity and thrived by adopting progressive policies.

Yeah, but whoever runs in 2016 will not be facing Jimmy Carter who had a misery index of 20 or higher and hostages held by Iran. Who ever the Republicans had nominated in 1980 would have won going away, a Dole, even a Ford, you just place a name in the blank and he would have won. It was one of those elections it didn't matter who the candidate was. The Republican would have won. Much like the election of 2008, the Democrats could have run just about anybody and won that one.

This Reform Party member thinks it is high past time that we start electing Americans to congress and the presidency who put America first and their political party further down the line. But for way too long we have been electing Republicans and Democrats who happen to be Americans instead of Americans who happen to be Republicans and Democrats.

Re: 2016 Republican Primary

Originally Posted by The Prophet

I would love for Rand Paul to be President. Some top contenders I wouldn't mind are Ted Cruz, Mike Lee, and Ben Carson, with Allen West as Secretary of Defense. However, someone such as West who voted to lock up US citizens indefinitely, I would never put in a position of too much authority.

I think the GOP will be making the biggest mistake of their life if they nominate a RINO like Christie, Bush or even Rubio. Sure a Christie will galvanize and lure a portion of moderates, but also he would turn away a key segment of the Republican voting block- real conservatives and libertarians, who are sick and tired of voting against someone, and now are searching 3rd party tickets.

I think the key will be to portray 2 distinctly different agendas to the American ppl. Clinton and socialism will be on 1 side of the ticket, and you don't want Christie and less socialism on the other side. Cruz or Paul would represent the biggest difference in ideals.

Yes, as well as guaranteeing the next president will again be a Democrat.

Former military man (and now babysitter of Donald Trump) John Kelly, is a big loud lying empty barrel!

Re: 2016 Republican Primary

Originally Posted by The Prophet

That'll be really transparent to gather hispanic votes by nomninating Rubio. It's like saying, "Hey, so you don't agree with our platform, but we nominated a hispanic so..." That's a bit like saying, how can I be racist, I have a black friend? lol

I don't think just by making one of them the poster boy for Republicanism (because it sure as hell isn't conservatism!) that it'll garner many, if any, votes.

I agree. I was going more off his public support for immigration reform.

With the republicans Christie is the front runner with 18.8% on average with Paul coming in second with 12.6%.
The last fox poll shows:
Christie 16%
Paul 11%
Cruz 12%
Ryan 12%
Bush 12%
Rubio 8%
Walker 6%

Looks like it is going to be a republican slug fest in the primaries all over.

Re: 2016 Republican Primary

The only two I would ever consider voting for on that list are Chris Christie and Jon Huntsman. I would absolutely never vote for Cruz or Paul under any circumstances. They're both lunatics.

Reasonable policies sound crazy to crazy ppl.

[QUOTE=Peter King Sorry, but Hillary Clinton is by far the most popular of these politicians and she has one huge ace up her sleeve to play (hubby Bill Clinton)]

Slick Willy can be as huge hindrance as well as a help. He's getting of age where he will say just about anything without thinking through the consequences first.

But you're right, she has name recognition, and everybody wishes to return to the good old days of the 90s. The Democratic primary will be cake for Hillary, but the General is where she will have problems. Can you even begin to imagine the campaign ads the GOP will run against her?

I think the Republican party, as it is known today, will look totally different in 2016. It is on the verge of transformation, not unlike the former WHIG party, whom was split between pro and anti slavery factions. Now the tea party and RINOS are split between conservatism and socialism factions.

I have a feeling that we see RINOS like McCain, Graham, Rubio, Christie, etc. pizzed off at the tea party because they are so used to getting all the GOP vote, and now all of a sudden they are taken to task on their conservative credentials. They now have to earn the GOP vote, and they don't like it 1 iota.

Re: 2016 Republican Primary

Originally Posted by Peter King Sorry, but Hillary Clinton is by far the most popular of these politicians and she has one huge ace up her sleeve to play (hubby Bill Clinton)

Slick Willy can be as huge hindrance as well as a help. He's getting of age where he will say just about anything without thinking through the consequences first.

But you're right, she has name recognition, and everybody wishes to return to the good old days of the 90s. The Democratic primary will be cake for Hillary, but the General is where she will have problems. Can you even begin to imagine the campaign ads the GOP will run against her?

I think the Republican party, as it is known today, will look totally different in 2016. It is on the verge of transformation, not unlike the former WHIG party, whom was split between pro and anti slavery factions. Now the tea party and RINOS are split between conservatism and socialism factions.

I have a feeling that we see RINOS like McCain, Graham, Rubio, Christie, etc. pizzed off at the tea party because they are so used to getting all the GOP vote, and now all of a sudden they are taken to task on their conservative credentials. They now have to earn the GOP vote, and they don't like it 1 iota.

I am not sure Hillary will win even the Democratic nomination. I look for a new face. Hillary does have name recognition and that puts here several football field ahead of any prospective rival at this time. But she has a problem, almost as many people view her unfavorable as favorable. 47% of all people have a favorable view of her, 45% disapprove of her. Her big advantage will be in the democratic primaries where 83% of all Democrats view her favorably vs. 11% who don't. But among independents who usually decide national elections, only 34% of all independents view Hillary favorably while 55% view her unfavorably.

If this holds there is no way she can win the independent vote. But she doesn't have to. She would need only around 45% of the independent vote as the Democratic base is much larger than the Republican one. 30 vs. 24. So the questions a numbers guy would ask can her 34% low favorability rating transform into the 45% of the independent vote she needs to win? The answer is yes, but it depends on who she is running against. It is like Missouri's senate race in 2012. How can a sitting senator, McCaskill with a very high 61% disapproval rating win? Simple, the Republicans nominate someone who has a 70% disapproval rating. McCaskill won. Candidates matter, in Missouri's case the Republicans threw away a sure win by nominating Aiken. The same thing can happen in 2016. But that is your problem.

This Reform Party member thinks it is high past time that we start electing Americans to congress and the presidency who put America first and their political party further down the line. But for way too long we have been electing Republicans and Democrats who happen to be Americans instead of Americans who happen to be Republicans and Democrats.

All these polls are dynamic and they continue to change. The others on your list is not being polled anymore. But on the Democratic side John Kerry and Elizabeth Warren are now. The poll matched these two against Christie but none of the others. Christie beat Kerry 46-35 and Warren 49-33.

I have seen no January polls, so these are the latest numbers. I suspect the ACA is causing the Democrats to lose support, especially among indpendents and has done so for the last two months. As of today it looks like the Republicans have a 50-50 change of gaining the senate in November. But of course all this depends on them nominating candidate capable of winning and no more Aiken’s or Mourdock’s which I highly doubt the GOP has that much sense.

This Reform Party member thinks it is high past time that we start electing Americans to congress and the presidency who put America first and their political party further down the line. But for way too long we have been electing Republicans and Democrats who happen to be Americans instead of Americans who happen to be Republicans and Democrats.